History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.799
History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t2.799
- Language
- English
v4.c63.t2.799.1
1788a Various efforts have been made about finding germs of history in the legend of Kalkin. In I. A. vol. 48 pp. 123-128 Prof. H. B. Bhide tries to show how Jain authorities about Kalkin are conflicting. Mr. K. P. Jayaswal in I. A. vol. 46 (for 1917) p. 145 holds that Kalkin must be identified with the great hero Yaśodharman who ruled over India from the Brahmaputra to the Western Ocean and from the Himālaya to Mahendra and who conquered the Hun Mihirakula and made him pay homage to his feet as stated in the Mandasor Inscription (vide Gupta Ins. p. 149). Prof. Pathak on the other hand relying upon certain Jaina sources identifies Kalkin with Mihirakula himself (I. A. for 1918 at p. 19). Otto Schrader in Brahmavidyā vol. I. pp. 17-27 discusses how the names Kalkin or Kalki came to be given to the saviour of India from Mlecchas, heretics and the like. Kalka means 'sin' or 'sediment' and Karka means 'a white horse'. Therefore he thinks that Kalkin is a form of *karkin* (one riding a white horse). Vide also N. I. A. vol. IV. pp. 337-343 (on Kalki from the Kalkipurāṇa).
v4.c63.t2.799.2
It is probable that the dismal accounts of Kaliyuga were put forth in the first centuries of the Christian era when the ancient varṇāśrama-dharma had suffered a great set-back owing to the ascendancy of Buddhism and Jainism and the invasions of foreigners like the Śakas and Hūṇas, that when Yaśodharman defeated the great Hun invader Mihirakula, people believed that the dark ages were at an end and that an era of perfect dharma was at hand. That Mihirakula was a most ruthless and blood-thirsty invader who in his long career of 70 years slaughtered myriads of men and women is stated by the Rājatarangiṇī I. 310 (which speaks of him as *trikoṭihan*) and 322 (which narrates that he slaughtered three crores of women of respectable birth together with their husbands, brothers and sons). Hiouen Chwang (Beal's B. R. W. W. pp. 171-172) narrates that Mihirakula either slaughtered or made slaves of nine lakhs of people in Gandhāra. Passages in a prophetic vein were added about the time of Yaśodharman to those already existing about the decline of dharma in Kaliyuga. This will of course necessitate that all passages about Kalkin in any work whatever were put in later than about 530 A. D. There are two theories as to who defeated Mihirakula. Hiouen Chwang's account gives the name of the victor as Bālāditya of Magadha (vide Beal's B. R. W. W. part I. pp. 167-171).
v4.c63.t2.799.3
On the other hand there are three inscriptions, the (*Continued from the last page*) Gwalior stone Inscription of Mihirakula (Gupta Ins. No. 37 p. 161), the Mandasor stone Pillar Inscription of Yaśodharman (Gupta Ins. No. 33 p. 142), and the Mandasor Stone Inscription of Yaśodharman Viṣṇuvardhana (Gupta Ins. No. 35 p. 150) in none of which is Bālāditya referred to. But in the Sarnath Stone of Prakaṭāditya, son of Bālāditya, another Bālāditya is referred to (Gupta Ins. No. 79 p. 284). In the Mandasor Stone Pillar Inscription (Gupta Ins. p. 147) occur these words relating to Mihirakula 'नीचैस्तेनापि यस्य प्रणतिभुजबलावर्जनाक्लिष्टमूर्ध्ना चूडापुष्पोपहारै-म्मिहिरकुलनृपेणार्श्वितं पादयुग्मम्'. In the Mandasor Stone Ins. (Gupta Ins. No. 35 at p. 153) lines 4 and 5 read अथ जयति नरेन्द्रः श्रीयशोधर्मनामा। आजौ जिती विजयते जगतीं पुनश्च श्रीविष्णुवर्धननराधिपतिः स एव॥ Dr. Fleet held that Yaśodharman and Viṣṇuvardhana were different, but the reasons he assigns are unconvincing and Jayaswal appears to be right in holding that Viṣṇuvardhana is the same as Yaśodharman (in 'Imperial History' pp. 39-41) and that Viṣṇuvardhana was the overlord of Bālāditya. It appears likely that the compilers of the extant Purāṇas combined the two principal parts of the two names Viṣṇuvardhana and Yaśodharman and that the conqueror of the Mlecchas was said to be Viṣṇuyaśas. Vide I. H. Q. vol. XII p. 531 and vol. XV pp. 302-306 for Yaśodharman, Viṣṇuvardhana and Mihirakula and Dr. R. G.
v4.c63.t2.799.4
Basak in 'History of North-East India' (1934) pp. 97-101 (who holds that Yaśodharman and Viṣṇuvardhana were two different Kings). Pargiter's 'Ancient Indian tradition' and 'Dynasties of the Kali age' and Dr. Pradhan's 'Chronology of Ancient India' may be read with advantage in connection with the historic material in the Purāṇas.